3
$\begingroup$

Given a general metric, $g_{ab}$ I can select an orthonormal basis $\omega^{a}$ such that,

$$g_{ab} = \eta_{ab}\omega^a \otimes \omega^b$$

where $\eta_{ab}$ = $\mathrm{diag}(1,-1,-1,-1).$ We may conveniently compute the spin connection and curvature form by employing Cartan's equations. The problem I have lies in getting back to the coordinate basis. I know the general formula,

$$R^{\mu}_{\nu \lambda \tau} = (\omega^{-1})^{\mu}_a \, \omega^b_\nu \, \omega^c_\lambda \, \omega^d_\tau \, R^{a}_{bcd}$$

where the l.h.s. $R^{\mu}_{\nu \lambda \tau}$ is in the coordinate basis. The objects $\omega^b$ are familiar, they're just the orthonormal basis, so what is the object $\omega^b_\nu$ (with the extra index)? The $(\omega^{-1})^{\mu}_a$ are the inverse vielbeins? How are these obtained?

I've visited several sources, including Wikipedia, but it's still not 100% clear. I'd appreciate any clarification, especially a small explicit example if possible.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Related question: physics.stackexchange.com/q/102722/2451 $\endgroup$ – Qmechanic Mar 20 '14 at 14:05
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic I noticed that question from another user, but it wasn't entirely helpful as I still don't know what the $\omega^b_\mu$'s are, or the $e^\mu_a$. $\endgroup$ – JamalS Mar 20 '14 at 14:07
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The notation seems to be bad and idiosyncratic. What you call $\omega^{a}$ other sources call $e^{a}={e^{a}}_{\mu}\,\mathrm{d}x^{\mu}$. The ${\omega^{a}}_{b}$ are the spin connections, and can be obtained via Cartan's equations. $\endgroup$ – Alex Nelson Mar 20 '14 at 14:21
  • $\begingroup$ @AlexNelson: Is the relation between the Riemann tensors of differing basis correct, if interpreted using your notation? $\endgroup$ – JamalS Mar 20 '14 at 14:43
  • $\begingroup$ @Qmechanic: Thank you for editing my post; it looks like my misunderstanding arose due to differing notation/terminology. $\endgroup$ – JamalS Mar 20 '14 at 17:12
4
$\begingroup$

The point is that, with your second equation, you are dealing with in a local coordinate patch, say an open set $U\subset M$ equipped with coordinates $x^\mu \equiv x^1,x^2,x^3,x^4$. Therefore, if $p\in U$, you can handle two bases of the tangent space $T_pM$. One is made of (pseudo)orthonormal vectors $e_a$, $a=1,2,3,4$ and the other is the one associated with the coordinates $\frac{\partial }{\partial x^\mu}|_p$, $\mu= 1,2,3,4$. The metric at $p$ reads: $$g_p = \eta_{ab} \omega^a \otimes \omega^b$$ where, by definition, the co-vectors $\omega^a \in T^*_pM$ (defining another pseudo-orthonormal tetrad but in the cotangent space at $p$) satisfy $$\omega^a (e_b) = \delta^a_b\:\:.\qquad(0)$$

Correspondingly you have: $$\omega^a = \omega^a_\mu dx^\mu|_p \:, \qquad (1)$$ and $\Omega :=[\omega^a_\mu]$ is a $4\times 4$ invertible matrix. Invertible because it is the transformation matrix between two bases of the same vector space ($T_p^*M$). Similarly $$e_a = e_a^\mu \frac{\partial}{\partial x^\mu}|_p\:,\qquad (2)$$ where $E:= [e^a_\mu]$ is a $4\times 4$ invertible matrix. It is an elementary exercise to prove that, in view of (0): $$E= \Omega^{-1t}\:,\qquad (3)$$ so you can equivalently write $$e_a^\mu = (\omega^{-1})_a^\mu$$ where the transposition operation in (3) is now apparent from the fact that we have swapped the positions of Greek and Latin indices (compare with (1)).

An identity as yours: $$R^{\mu}_{\nu \lambda \tau} = (\omega^{-1})^{\mu}_a \, \omega^b_\nu \, \omega^c_\lambda \, \omega^d_\tau \, R^{a}_{bcd}$$ is understood as a trivial change of basis relying upon (1) and (2). It could equivalently be written down as: $$R^{\mu}_{\nu \lambda \tau} = e^{\mu}_a \, \omega^b_\nu \, \omega^c_\lambda \, \omega^d_\tau \, R^{a}_{bcd}\:.$$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @V. Moretti. Fyi you can use the command \tag{<your label>} to label equations. $\endgroup$ – joshphysics Mar 27 '14 at 2:27
0
$\begingroup$

They are your tetrad. If we take, say, Schwarzschild spacetime in Schwarzschild coordinates, one choice for the $e_{\mu}{}^{I}$ is:

$e_{t}{}^{t} = \sqrt{1-\frac{2M}{r}}$

$e_{r}{}^{r} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\frac{2M}{r}}}$

$e_{\theta}{}^{\theta} = r$

$e_{\phi}{}^{\phi} = r\sin\theta$

with all others zero. The key point to notice here is that $g_{ab} = e_{a}{}^{I}e_{b}{}^{J}\eta_{IJ}$. It is often convention to leave off the internal indices, but I would recommend leaving them in until it's obvious what you're doing. I think you're confused by your first equation.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.